Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    June 4, 2012 3:00pm-3:30pm PDT

3:00 pm
providing bicycle and pedestrian access. the height of the project allows for more residents, while the stepped-down envelope respects the adjacent to conditions and the greenspace and retail along the street provide a permeable edge which will bring together the rest of the community, so i wholeheartedly support that. but it's -- chair mar: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am architect and a principal in a firm in downtown san francisco. for years, i worked on the embarcadero and am familiar with the challenges it presents. i am pleased to be your on behalf of the individuals who have worked for years to support the development of the waterfront communities. coststo be sure, -- to be sure, this does not belong there.
3:01 pm
we deserve to find new and re- purpose uses or the urban fabric, and the water's edge needs to continue to evolve with dignity and grace. change is difficult, but acknoledgement. such bold steps are needed. at the end of teh day, -- the day, it is a template. regarding site design and public-pedestrian activities and access. after comment, two mixed use buildings now stepped back from
3:02 pm
the embarcadero, with mixed use benefiting the public including gowns -- ground-floor restaurants, and an aquatics center and more. parking will be provided for the public with the added benefit of bicycle parking. and let's not forget the many units of subsidized affordable housing. thank you. chair mar: thank you so much. next speaker. good afternoon, supervisors. i am in support of the 8 washington project. this will be part of redefining the waterfront.
3:03 pm
this is a collection of disconnected pockets of spaces, remnants of a demolished by way, and not yet contributing to the newly defined relationship between a world-class city and its waterfront. this addresses the dramatic height difference between the and bargainer -- embarcadero center and the buildings. by consolidating these and stepping down towards the embarcadero. on the density and streetscape, there is the terror -- terracing scheme. this is on the west side of the embarcadero, where we know that
3:04 pm
urban spaces are prone to fail without people. combining copy shops and restaurants with public open spaces would ensure the streetscapes at various times of the day, and lastly, the existing athletic center could move into the new one, supporting the relationship. on a city scale, this would benefit from the public spaces that replace these. and this contributes to a larger urban experience. chair mar: there is about 30
3:05 pm
seconds to go. miss? >> good afternoon. this is out of baby. this is development. we respectfully request a project. if you look at the district with this project, we will know that the height is actually not an issue. this is a local business enterprise. 8 washington is sincere.
3:06 pm
for businesses and residents, so i urge you to support this also. chair mar: thank you. i am going to call a few more names. [calling names] ma'am? >> my name is marcie albert, and i am here on behalf of quite a few of my neighbors. i do not have to tell you what the design is. you know all of that. and we urged the subcommittee to grant the exceptions needed and pass it on to the board, and we urge all of the board to get it going. chair mar: thank you. mr. collin?
3:07 pm
>> we have been doing this for six years as the project has evolved. first, we have to commend public staff for doing this. they have done this city proud, and it is a credit to the city, the work that they have done. i remind you that the heights are one half the height of the closest residential building at golden gateway center. this is one-quarter of a height of the nearest commercial center. embarcadero center. on the question of the financial benefits, we would note that $11 million to find affordable housing is analogous to a 25% inclusionary rate. this is especially with the demise of redevelopment. this could be leverage significantly to provide a whole lot more. the mayor's office of housing is
3:08 pm
effectively broke right now. and in spite of the months of heated rhetoric, what is before you is a simple choice. it is what happens to the seawall lot. it gives to the city enormous design changes and benefits proposed in this project, or should be preserved as a surface parking lot? it is a big project that does all of these things, or its days as a parking lot for a long time, and that would be a disastrous choice for the city. please approve this. they keep. chair mar: mr. terrio? >> i would like to thank them for giving us these height
3:09 pm
limits. that process went on for several months. someone was going to be dissatisfied in the end, no matter what, as is the case. , what they have presented is clear and elegant. i would also suggest that supervisors cohen and mar that both neighborhoods are already well equipped with hills. please approve this. thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is michael mckenna. i were present local 6. i would like to state my support for this project. i think it is well thought out, well designed, with the lowering of the buildings. i understand supervisor chu's
3:10 pm
concern. 20 years ago, when the last study was done, there was a monolithic freeway that ran across that area and turned those buildings backwards toward the embarcadero, and i go there. i was at the port commission, and i know that if i can drive there, it is a back alley and a vacant lot. it is causing the light, and it is underutilized and does not serve the city. this is a terrible use of our waterfront. our ability to get their, so as you come down along the embarcadero, we do not have demolished lots, and we need to
3:11 pm
move this project forward and bring more vitality to the waterfront that we have and bring it to life more. chair mar: thank you. i am going to call a few more names. [calling names] justin, manny -- >> that afternoon, supervisors. i am with the sheet workers. i am in support of this program. i urge you to move it forward. this is to revitalize this portion of the waterfront. so we ask you to move this forward. thank you very much. >> get afternoon, supervisors. this is in support of the
3:12 pm
washington project. we believe this is a significant improvement. this has pedestrian friendly, publicly accessible open space, and aquatics center, ground- floor retail, an underground parking. the heights are appropriate for the area. the project sponsor has made adjustments for the design and scale of the buildings, and given the proximity, the scale of the project is modest and appropriate. we would also like to note that these sites are responsive to what came out of the embarcadero design study, including as it draws closer to the water and nears the park. it is important to notice that 8 washington's proximity will
3:13 pm
encourage visitors to a bicycle and walk as opposed to making more car trips. this will help to reconnect the city streets. and this will include an improved experience. this is significant for the city's effort for affordable housing. on behalf of us, we urge you to support it. chair mar: next speaker. >> hi, my9 bridget my name is bill. i have been here for 32 years. i wanted to states and numbers about land use and what you were doing there. sunlight. sunlight. there is space already.
3:14 pm
this will be reduced to 21,000 square feet in the aquatics center, which is a reduction of over 7% of where the sun shines. where did that number come from? and this makes it sound better for presentation purposes. what does that tell us? you should look at these numbers that are being presented to you for judgment, and then there would be other types of representation like this. lastly, you get a chance to change the law to allow this
3:15 pm
project, just because you have the power to make it legal. it does not mean it is right. chair mar: thank you. >> i am appearing before you on behalf of the ferry building. this issue should not be before you. i will not repeat some things, leaving them for another day. today, i am here to talk about the continued failure of the city to honor its obligations in connection with the proposed 8 washington project. for years, the legacy of the ferry building has transformed it into the jewel of the san francisco waterfront.
3:16 pm
and the city also had a parking agreement assuring parking to the ferry building and its merchants, dedicated parking that is now located at seawall lot 351. the projects remain inconsistent with that legal commitment. in essence, the proposal is to take that seawall lot, the dedicated parking, dedicated to the ferry building, to build a project. support staff only recently met with eop to discuss these matters and still has not had a proposal to meet the obligations. we request the committee not act on the process at this time.
3:17 pm
there is nothing about this project that is currently proposed. for the breach of the parking commitment, risking the vitality of the building. chair mar: thank you, mr. grisham. there is one last card. if there is anyone else who would like to speak, please fill out mcarn and come on forward. >> i am a longtime waterfront watcher. i do not think i have to repeat of the things about this step down, how attractive it is, how it totally concurs with the northeast waterfront planning study. what i want to focus on is the public trust land swap. it is extremely difficult for a site as small as this and as
3:18 pm
small as most of the waterfront northern embarcadero lot to provide the state lands of required public access, while at the same time having any kind of a financially viable proposal. because this project combines trust and not trust lands and provides a land swap that gives the state lands commission the public access, open space that is critical to the waterfront, it is something that is extremely difficult to do. i do not think you have to worry too much more about some of the other northern waterfront parking lots. it is so critical with the state lands commission.
3:19 pm
this is a tremendous project, and i urge you to move it forward. chair mar: thank you. >> hi, my name is alan marke. they originally considered the development of eight washington and also simply called for the combining of the ports land with the golden gateway land. although the regional project design complied with the 84-foot limit, over the last 1.5 years, a lot has gone into public planning to meet community desires. making the height limit the issue. this is nearly twice as tall.
3:20 pm
it is more difficult to sell. how -- this is providing one to one parking. the 100%. the parking as well as affordable housing. and lastly, more housing, more density, and the ability of the families to stay here.
3:21 pm
>> good afternoon. after spending years, i offer my unqualified support for the proposed eight washington project. i will not dwell on the many other public benefits of the project. its consistency or its outstanding architectural design. instead, i will discuss the role it will play in making it the truly renowned urban boulevard. i am really proud of what we accomplished our partnership with the city and the port of san francisco. the waterfront is remarkably different, in large part of it because it was built on our shared values and regulatory processes to attract and mightn't developers. the result is an attractive, vibrant, and every grieving landscape that is being built on
3:22 pm
san francisco's historic years along the embarcadero. -- historic piers along the embarcadero. both sides of the roadway, some have this. in other places, other structures forming the boulevard. this project will replace one of these with a beautiful structure that will complete the frame with the others. and on the other hand, any change is measured by its possible flaws. whatever its flaws, this will replace an unwelcoming design issue with architectural excellence. therefore, in your consideration, i urge you to recognize that among its many benefits, it will achieve a
3:23 pm
major urban design benefit. chair mar: thank you. mr. floras? >> thank you, supervisor. manny flores, the union. is this a perfect project approved by no means. but it is a pretty good design. it is a smart design. i encourage you to approve these amendments. i really hate to lose this one, because in the words of coach harbaugh, -- thank you. chair mar: thank you. next speaker. >> actually, the coach says who has got it better than us? wu has gotten better than us?
3:24 pm
-- who has gotten better than us? i am here representing a consortium of construction companies based in the bayview hunters point, and this will be for developers and owners to drive opportunities, and we believe that supporting this project would have a direct and positive impact, as they have a business role and are dedicated to hiring local baby residents. as you know, this has suffered disproportionately, and we believe this is one of the positive projects that would help with the crime rate, and we would ask for your support on this project. >> -- chair mar: thank you. i am going to call a few more names. [calling names]
3:25 pm
>> i would like to thank the supervisors for a meeting today. i am a little confused i am in this proposed development. i thought that the reason we were here was to consider whether to propose an exception to the 84-foot height. that, as i am sure that president chiu can say here, came from a lot of wells fought discussions about what that height should be. to talk about whether there should be a cafe or a parking lot, how expensive the condominium should be, i am going to put that aside. my question is why should this group, represented by high paid lawyers, have a right to say that the city of san francisco should amend this hiked? talking about tangents from the
3:26 pm
top of the trans am building down to the ferry building, down to the anbar derryl 1 -- down to the in bardera -- the embarcadero 1 and the deli, the only reason is money. if they want to make this 84 feet, 83.5 feet, i do not have a problem with that. thank you. chair mar: next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is tobi levine, and i am here in support of the project. you had course 101 on 8
3:27 pm
washington, and you know more than most of the world knows about this particular project, and i wanted to know what i could say that you have not heard, and i was on a board back in the 1990's, ahead her -- 1990's, and we had a mandate for the waterfront, and it was completed and approved by the port commission in 1997 and you all in 1998, with amendments that have occurred since the ruling documents for the waterfront, and i take a look at the waterfront what the people
3:28 pm
who put the document together initially basically had in mind, they had public open space, retail, job generators, and recreational enterprises. of course, that is what we have at 8 washington. secondly, right after that plan and came into being, then came the waterfront design. and this kind of elaborated this plan. and this is the importance of one day reuniting the waterfront as a whole, and so with those two documents, both of which come from the 1990's but are still important today, i think you have got every good reason to vote in favor of this plan. thank you. chair mar: thank you, ms. levine.
3:29 pm
next speaker. >> i participated in the northeast steading and the embarcadero steady, and out of that process, i started this organization to try to bring non financially interested parties together, whether that the people who were not homeowners or those who are not connected with the community. i think it is important to have more voices at the table. as part of the study, ultimately, it was decided that a bunch of 84-foot-tall buildings were not the best for the site. there is a presentation of how to step down plan is important. it is inappropriate because it respects the situation and makes a much better project. my group is particularly interested in the public benefits of this project. right now,
left
right